Copts Encyclopedia > Philosophy and Religion > Christianity > Christianity: General Copts Copts (kŏpts) [ key ], the native Christian minority of Egypt; estimates of the number of Copts in Egypt range from 5% to 17% of the population. Copts are not ethnically distinct from other Egyptians; they are a cultural remnant, i.e., the Christians who have not been converted to Islam in the 14 centuries since the Muslim invasion. The Coptic language, now extinct, was the form of the ancient Egyptian language spoken in early Christian times; by the 12th cent. it was superseded by Arabic. Most Copts belong to the Coptic Church, an autonomous Christian sect that officially adheres to Monophysitism , which was declared (451) a heresy by the Council of Chalcedon. The church is in communion with the Jacobite Church (also Monophysite). The Ethiopian Orthodox Church was long part of the Coptic Church, but changes in the mid-20th cent. led to autonomy for the former in 1959 when an independent Ethiopian patriarch was consecrated.

In rites and customs the Coptic Church resembles other Eastern churches; however, Copts circumcise their infants before baptism and observe certain Mosaic dietary laws. Coptic, Greek, and Arabic languages are all used ceremonially. The chief bishop, the patriarch of Alexandria, is in direct succession to the 5th-century patriarchs who embraced Monophysitism; he is entitled pope. Among the Copts a small minority are in communion with the pope; these "Catholic Copts" have their own organization and churches but share the rites and practices of the Coptic Church. This community began to develop in the 18th cent. Protestant missionaries have established some Coptic congregations. Besides Copts there are Orthodox communities in Egypt, mainly Greek and Syrian; the Orthodox patriarch of Alexandria traces his succession to the Catholic patriarchs of the 5th cent. There are also many Catholic Syrians, mainly Melchites and Maronites. In recent decades, Copts have been the object of attacks by Muslim fundamentalists in Egypt, especially in the aftermath of the overthrow in 2013 of President Morsi , a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, by the military. See D.

Attwater, The Christian Churches of the East (2 vol., 1947–48); E. Wakin, A Lonely Minority: The Story of Egypt's Copts (1963); M. Kāmil, Coptic Egypt (1968); O. F. A. Meindarus, Christian Egypt: Faith and Life (1970). The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2012, Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. See more Encyclopedia articles on: Christianity: General Advertisement Advertisement Copts - Encyclopedia Copts GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES COPTS, the early native Christians of Egypt and their successors of the Monophysite sect, now racially the purest representatives of the ancient Egyptians. The name is a Europeanized form, dating perhaps from the 14th century, of the Arabic Kibt (or Kubt), which, in turn, is derived from the Greek Ai'yinrTwt, "Egyptians" (the Copts in the Coptic language likewise style themselves pEUNX?uw, "people of Egypt," "Egyptians").

The limited application of the name is explained by the circumstances of the time when Mahomet sent forth his challenge to the world and `Amr conquered Egypt (A.D. 627-641). At that time the population of Egypt was wholly Christian (except for a sprinkling of Jews, &c.), divided into two fiercely hostile sects, the Monophysites and the Melkites. The division was in great measure racial. The Melkites, adherents of the orthodox or court religion sanctioned by the council of Chalcedon, were mainly of foreign extraction, from the various Hellenistic races which peopled the Eastern Roman empire, while the bulk of the population, the true Egyptians, were Monophysite. Amongst the latter political aspirations, apart from religion, may be said not to have existed. It has generally been held that the Copts invited and aided the Moslems to seize the country in order that at all costs they might be freed from the yoke of the state religion imposed by the Eastern Roman Empire; but Dr A. J. Butler has shown this view to be untenable, while admitting that the religious feuds of the Christians made the task of the Arabs easy.

The mysterious Mukaukis, who treacherously handed over Alexandria, impregnable as it was for Arab warriors, and then capitulated, was none other than Cyrus, the Melkite patriarch and governor of Egypt; the native Monophysite party, however, smarting under the persecution of the Emperor Heraclius, seemed to have most to gain by a change of masters. The prophet Mahomet himself had prescribed indulgence to the Copts before his death, and `Amr was mercifully disposed to them. Although they offered resistance in some places, after the Roman forces had been destroyed or had abandoned Egypt they generally acquiesced in the inevitable; and when in 646 a Roman fleet and army recaptured Alexandria and harried the Delta, the Copts helped the Moslems to cast out the Christian invaders. Some of the Copts embraced Islam at once, but as yet they formed practically a solid Christian nation under the protection of the conquering Arabs, and the religious and political distinction between the "true believers" and the Christians was so sharp that a native Christian turning Moslem was no longer a Copt, i.e. Egyptian; he practically changed his nationality.

The beginnings of Christianity in Egypt are obscure; the existence of it among the natives (as opposed to the mixed "Greek" population of Egypt and Alexandria which produced so many leading figures and originated leading doctrines in the early church) can be traced back as far as the Decian persecution (A.D. 249-251) in the purely Egyptian names of several martyrs. St Anthony (c. A.D. 270) was a Copt; so also was Pachomius, the founder of Egyptian monasticism at the beginning of the 4th century. The scriptures were translated into Coptic not later than the 4th century. A religion founded on morality and with a clear doctrine of life after death was especially congenial to the Egyptians; thus the lower orders in the country embraced Christianity fervently, while the Alexandrian pagans were lost in philosophical speculation and Neoplatonism was spread amongst the rich "Greek" landowners; these last, partly out of religious enthusiasm, partly from greed, annoyed and oppressed their Christian peasantry.

Egypt was then terribly impoverished; the upper country was constantly overrun by raiders from Nubia and the desert; and the authority of the imperial government was too weak to interfere actively on behalf of the Christians. The monasteries, however, were refuges that could bid defiance to the most powerful of the pagan aristocracy as well as to barbarian hordes, and became centres of united action that, at the summons of Shenoute, the organizer of the national church, swept away the idols of the oppressors in riot and bloodshed. In the course of the 5th century the Christians reached a position in which they were able to treat the pagans mercifully as a feeble remnant. The Copts had little interest in theology; they were content to take their doctrine as prepared for them by the subtler minds of their Greek leaders at Alexandria, choosing the simplest form when disputes arose.

In 325 their elected patriarch, Athanasius, and his following of Greeks and Copts, triumphed at the council of Nicaea against Arius; but in 451 the banishment of Dioscorus, patriarch of Alexandria, by the council of Chalcedon created a great schism, the Egyptian church holding to his Monophysite tenets (see Coptic Church, below), while the Catholic and imperial party at Constantinople ever sought to further the "Melkite" cause in Egypt at the expense of the native church. Thenceforward there were generally two patriarchs, belonging to the rival communities, and the Copts were oppressed by the Melkites; Heraclius, in 638 after the repulse of the Persians, endeavoured to unite the churches, but, failing in that, he persecuted the Monophysites more severely than ever before, until `Amr brought Egypt under the Moslem rule of `Omar, as has been related above.

Under the persecution many Copts had gone over to the Melkites, but now it was the turn of the Melkites, as supporters of the emperor of Constantinople, to suffer, and they almost entirely disappeared from Egypt, though a remnant headed by a patriarch of Alexandria of the Orthodox Christians has survived to this day. But after a few years of the mild rule of `Amr the Egyptians began to be squeezed for the benefit of the Moslem exchequer and persecuted for their religion. Many of the more thoughtful and sober Christians must long have been disgusted with religious strife, and had already embraced the simple and congenial doctrines of Islam; others went over for the sake of material gain. Conflicts arose from time to time between the Mahommedan minority and the Christians. The Copts were excellent scribes and accountants and were continued in their posts under the Arab rule; the government offices were full of them; sometimes even the wazirate (vizierate) was held by a Copt, and that too in a time of persecution of the Christians.

The pride of the Copts, still seen in the objection which the poorest among them have to engaging in any mean work or trade, was a serious danger, perhaps even a chief source of their troubles, in earlier days; devout Moslems on more than one occasion stirred the mob to fury when they saw Christians lording it over "true believers." The lower orders of the Copts were continually oppressed. Thus there was every inducement amongst the Christians to turn Mahommedan. Arab tribes, too, were encouraged to settle in Egypt until the Mahommedans exceeded the Copts in numbers. The history of the Copts consists on the one hand of the record of religious strife, of growing scandals in the church, such as simony, and attempted reforms; and on the other hand of persecutions at the hands of the Moslems. As examples of the severity of the persecutions, it may be noted that, in the 8th century, the monks not only were compelled to pay a capitation tax, but were branded with name and number, civilians were oppressed with heavy taxation, churches demolished, pictures and crosses destroyed (722-723).

Degrading dresses were imposed upon the Christians (849-850); later, under Hakim (997), they were compelled to wear heavy crosses and black turbans as an ignominious distinction. Salaheddin (Saladin) in 1171 reenforced these statutes and defiled the churches. In 1301, the blue turban was introduced, but many Copts preferred a change of religion to the adoption of this head-dress. In 1348 a religious war, attended by the destruction of churches and mosques and great loss of life, raged at Cairo between the Copts and Mahommedans, and large numbers of the former embraced Islam. Their oppression practically ceased under Mehemet Ali (1811). There have been very few cases of conversion from Mahommedanism to Christianity; and, as intermarriage of Christians with Mahommedans implied conversion to Islam, the Copts have undoubtedly preserved the race of the Egyptians as it existed at the time of the Arab conquest in remarkable purity.

The Coptic agricultural population (fellahin) in the villages of Upper Egypt and elsewhere are not markedly different from the Mahommedan fellahin, who, of course, are of the same stock, but mixed with Arab blood. The Copts in the towns, who have always been engaged in sedentary occupations, as scribes and handicraftsmen, have a more delicate frame and complexion, and may have mingled with Syrian and Armenian Christians. According to the 1907 census, there were 667,036 orthodox Copts in Egypt, or less than 1 1 4 -th of the total population, this being the same proportion as in 1830, when, according to Lane, they numbered about 150,000. The number of churches and monasteries at the same time had risen from 146 to 450, not including Protestant chapels nor Coptic Catholic churches.

At the 1907 census the total number of Christians in Egypt described as Copts was 706,322; among them there were 24,710 Protestants and 14,576 Roman Catholics. Monogamy is strict among the Copts, and divorce is granted only for adultery. Circumcision of both sexes is common before baptism. In regard to dress, at present only the clergy retain the old distinctive costume and black turban. The rest of the Copts dress exactly like their Moslem brethren, from whom they can be distinguished only by the cross which many of them still have tattooed just below the palm of the right hand. Since the British occupation of the country' there has been a tendency amongst the Coptic women to give up the veil, which they had borrowed from the Mahommedans; this is especially noticeable at places like Assiut, where, thanks to the efforts of American missionaries, female education has made much progress. In trades and professions, so long as the Copts had no foreign competition to contend against, they maintained their supremacy over the rest of the population.

They filled government offices; in towns and villages they monopolized trades and professions requiring care and skill. They were the accountants, the architects, the goldsmiths, the carpenters, the land-surveyors, the bonesetters, &c. But, with the extension of railways and agricultural roads and the increased facilities of communication and prosperity, there has been a great influx of Italian, Greek, Armenian and other Levantine workmen, who, with their better tools, are undoubtedly superior to the Copts, and have proved most formidable rivals. Furthermore, the importation of cheap European wares of every description is slowly killing all native industry. Lastly, since the British, as the dominant race, have filled most posts of responsibility in the government, the Moslems, in general, are obliged to content themselves with the subordinate posts which in the past they left to the Copts. Some Copts have attained high office, and in 1908 a Copt became prime minister. Moreover, the Copts have. to a certain extent made up for the ground they lose elsewhere by engaging in agriculture and banking, and there are now to be found many rich Coptic landowners and farmers, especially in Upper Egypt.

Coptic Christians in Modern Egypt Knowledge Base > Philosophy > Religion Coptic Christians in Modern Egypt The Copts are the native Egyptian Christians, a major ethnoreligious group in Egypt and the largest Christian group there. Christianity was the majority religion during the 4th to 6th centuries AD and until the Muslim conquest of Egypt and remains the faith of a significant minority population. Market Research and Political Polling Analyst Curated Facts Egypt's Christian minority has been the target of a number of high-profile attacks in the past several years. The bombing of a major church in Alexandria in January 2011 left at least 21 people dead, and at least 25 Coptic Christians and their supporters were killed in clashes with the army in October. That incident was the bloodiest in Egypt since its revolution in February (2011). Article: Overcrowding at Coptic po... Tensions between Muslims and Coptic Christians, who make up about 10 percent of the population here, have risen steadily since the sweeping vows of unity during the revolution that toppled President Hosni Mubarak three months ago.

Copts say they have felt increasingly embattled since clashes just south of Cairo left a church burning last month (April, 2012). Article: Muslims and Coptic Christ... As Egypt prepares for the presidential elections at the end of May (2012), the country's sizeable Coptic Christian minority will vote - but with a wary eye on the past. The community says they were treated like second-class citizens during the era of former president Hosni Mubarak. Now after the rise of Islamists, they are hoping for a moderate leader to protect their rights. Article: How will Egypt's Coptic C... Since the Jan. 25 revolution that removed President Hosni Mubarak from power, 100,000 Christian families have emigrated abroad, according to Naguib Gibrael, the Coptic Church’s lawyer. To counter the Muslim Brotherhood, St. Mark’s has encouraged its parishioners to vote for the secular Egyptian Bloc, made up of both Muslim and Christian candidates. Article: Egypt’s Christians Prep... The ancient Christian community makes up between 10 and 15% of a population of 82 million, and is by far the largest Christian community in the region.

The Copts stand to lose more than any other group in Egypt's current drift following the fall of an unpopular autocracy. Article: Egypt's Coptic Christians... (In 2005) under Pope Shenouda III, the Coptic Church underwent some organizational changes that were clearly perceived as a threat to the Egyptian government under President Mubarak, despite groundbreaking progress towards ecumenism and cooperation between Muslims and Christians at large. × Amazon Results In 1998, the International Coptic Federation took out a full-page advertisement in the Washington Post complaining that the Egyptian Copts were "Experiencing ... the worst hardships in their modern history." More specifically, the advertisement complained of government "restrictions on church activities, discrimination in political, academic and military affairs, rape and forced conversion of Coptic girls and requierments that Copts pay protection money." × Amazon Results Over the course of more than fourteen centuries, Christians and Muslims have lived together in Egypt, and not once has their relationship degenerated into a sectarian civil war. There have been periods of heightened tension and periods marked by cooperation. The period of the Mubarak presidency has been, in many ways, emblematic of the nature of the relationships that have existed over time.

× Amazon Results Traditionally Islam was the ideology of the state within which the Coptic Christian minority formed a subordinated himmi community. For a brief moment from the end of the nineteenth century until the end of the 1920s there seemed to be a process of consensus forming around a secular and liberal Egyptian national identity, as best expressed by the enormously popular nationalist‐liberal party that had pioneered the struggle for Egyptian independence from Britain in the early part of the twentieth century. The Plight of the Largest Native Christian Minority in the Muslim World: The Copts of Egypt. - Middle East Resources Middle East Resources Islamic Reform The Plight of the Largest Native Christian Minority in the Muslim World: The Copts of Egypt. A lecture delivered by Rev. Bassam Michael Madany at the 1978 Convention of the International Society for Reformed Faith and Action, held at the Chapel of Reformed Bible College, in Grand Rapids, Michigan. An Introductory Note On Wednesday, 31 October, 2012, the Arab daily online Elaph reported the disappearance about one month ago. of Sarah Isaac, a 14-year old Coptic girl.

The family lived in a small village near Marsa Matrouh, in Northwest Egypt. It turned out that she was abducted, forced to Islamize, and marry a Muslim man. The Coptic priest of the parish, Anba Machomius, explained in an article published in the Egyptian press, that the law does not allow any girl at that young age to be married. Details of the story may be accessed in the original Arabic at: Incidents of abduction of young Coptic girl have become a frequent and painful problem for the Copts of Egypt. They point to the sufferings of a community that has been in Egypt for more than 2000 years. Their plight has worsened after the fall of President Mubarak, and the election of President Muhammad Morsi, a member of the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood. The text of my lecture of 34 years ago would help the reader to understand and sympathize with the serious plight of our brothers and sisters in the Land of the Nile. The Copts are the native Christians of Egypt. They are the descendants of the peoples who had lived in that land prior to the Arab conquest in the 7th century.

Since they form the largest Christian minority within the Muslim World, it is very instructive to pay a special attention to their status within Egypt. In many ways they typify the plight of most Christian communities living under Islam. My sources are threefold 1: Private communications received from Egyptian Christians. All such documents were unsolicited, and came to me as responses to my daily radio ministry of the Word of God over international radio stations that beamed their programs in the direction of the Middle East, from 1958 - 1994. 2. References made to the status of Egyptian Christians in the international press. 3. A scholarly research published in 1963: “A Lonely Minority: The Modern Story of Egypt’s Copts.” The author, Edward Wakin, was a journalist who showed unusual sympathy for the Copts. Even though more than three decades have passed since the appearance of the book, its findings are just as accurate at the beginning of the twenty first century as when they first appeared in the early 1960s.

While Copts have always had their difficult times under the various regimes that ruled Egypt since the Arab conquest, yet the advent of the republican regime in 1952 marked the beginning of a new phase of subtle and unrelenting persecution. Even though Naser was perceived by many Arabs as a great nationalistic hero, yet he was at heart a strong Pan-Islamist leader and did very little to make the Christians of Egypt feel at ease. One must look hard in Arabic newspapers and magazines to find a reference to the national Christians be they Copts or otherwise. Recently, I was surprised by the frank discussion of the problem in an international weekly magazine published in Paris, Al-Mostakbal (The Future). The writer was commenting on the dilemma that faces Middle East Christians who, no matter how hard they try, are not fully accepted by the Muslim majority. As an example, he cited the case of Dr. Butros Butros Ghali. At the time, he was the only Copt with an important position in the Egyptian government. He was serving as under-secretary in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Egypt.

After the late President Sadat's visit to Jerusalem and the accord of Camp David, both the prime minister and the foreign minister of Egypt resigned. President Sadat appointed Dr. Ghali as acting foreign minister. The writer asked the rhetorical question why not a full foreign minister? Well, Dr. Ghali was a Copt. How could he be fully entrusted with the foreign affairs of Egypt? Later on, during the 1990s, he did serve as Secretary General of the Security Council of the United Nations! The columnist remembered a similar incident that had taken place during the Naser regime. Between 1958 and 1961, Syria and Egypt merged to form the United Arab Republic. During one of Nasser’s visits to the northern province of the UAR (Syria), he attended the maneuvers of some Syrian army units. He noticed that several officers had names like Michael, George and John. He asked: "How come you have so many Copts holding key positions in the army?" "Your Excellency,” replied a local senior army officer, "we have no Copts in Syria.

These men are native Syrian Christians." Such references to discrimination that Christians suffer in the Middle East are important and they remind us that the problem is not simply a thing of the past. It is a bitter present reality. According to Edward Wakin, the study of the status of the Copts today is extremely important, for as he puts it: “Viewed today from the West, the Copts are a major test of modern coexistence between a large Christian minority and a Moslem majority. In the Middle East, the Copts constitute the largest body of Christians in that part of the world where Christianity was born. For Egypt which is trying to mobilize all its human resources into a modern state, the test may be decisive. For a mosaic of minorities in the Middle Eastern countries of Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Turkey, the Coptic story can be read as handwriting on the wall. For the Christians of Lebanon, who are maintaining an uneasy dominance in a country evenly divided between Christians and Moslems, their prospects in Moslem Arab hegemony can be deciphered from the Coptic situation in Egypt. It is a problem echoed nearby in the tenuous Greek-Turkish partnership of Christian and Moslem in the island republic of Cyprus.

Involved, besides the Western values for which the Copts stand, is the fate of tolerance and respect for the individual in the vast self-centered world community of 400 million Moslems. On an even larger stage, the Copts share the dream of the world's minorities, ranging from the recent sufferings of Jews and Armenians to such current problems as Jews in Russia, Protestants in Spain.” P. 4 How prophetic these words have become. July 1974 witnessed the invasion of Cyprus by the Turkish army using NATO supplied arms paid for by the American taxpayer! Two hundred thousand Greek Cypriots were made homeless overnight. No one seemed to care for the human rights of these natives of Cyprus. They had been living in their island for more than two millennia. Turkey must be appeased at any cost, since it occupied such a strategic position near the borders of the USSR! It is a very sad fact that in the analysis of the problems of the Christian in a Muslim society today, no emphasis is placed on the religious nature of his plight. Christians are described in ethnic or hard to recognize terms such as: Armenians, Assyrians, Copts, Maronites, etc.

While this classification is valid up to a certain extent, the true nature of the problems that these ethnic groups face is not due to their ethnicity but to the faith of their community. This is why Wakin's book is so important. Coming from a secularized culture in the USA, yet he did not allow that factor to forget or minimize the religious nature of the plight of minorities living under Islam. In the final analysis, Middle East Christians are considered as second-class citizens, and sometimes persecuted, because they belong to a community that in Arabic is known as the Messianic minority. Many things have happened in Egypt since the death of president Naser in the early seventies. Under President Sadat, socialism was completely discarded; a new policy was adopted allowing many international companies to compete openly in bidding for projects related to the renewal of the economy of Egypt. The terrible defeat in the war of 1967 was avenged by the partial victory of the October 1973 (Yom Kippur) war that resulted in the eventual withdrawal of Israel from Sinai. But one thing has not changed: the Muslim’s attitude to the Copt. The latter is still despised, persecuted, and at times brutally murdered by radical Islamists.

Whether the Copt is an ordinary layman or Pope Shenuda, the head of the Orthodox Coptic Church, Muslims look upon him with derision or suspicion. This is why the Copt has identified with the cross, a symbol of suffering more than any other Christian community. Edward Wakin described this facet of the Copt’s life in a chapter entitled: THE PEOPLE'S CHURCH. “The cross suits this cruel culture of poverty and persecution, both as identification and an outlet for the Copts. It is their brand and their balm; it gives a meaning to life when there are only blind nature and inexplicable misfortune. If Western Christianity gives prime glory to Easter, the day of Resurrection, deliverance and confirmation of Christ's divinity --- Good Friday is more appropriate psychologically to the Copts. On this day when the cross was born as a universal Christian symbol, modern Copts say "Kyrie eleison" (Lord, have mercy upon us) 400 times at home, 100 times in each direction, and flock to their churches.” P. 136 “While the Copts share the cross with the rest of Christianity, with no other group is its presence so obsessive.

This ranges from the Patriarch, who holds the cross in front of himself as though it were both a shield and a weapon, to the ragged village children who run after strangers, with crude blue tattoos of the cross on the inside of their right wrists and crosses around their necks. Whenever the Patriarch appears, Copts rush forward to kiss his cross. The fixation is symbolized at baptism when the infant is anointed 36 times all over his body.” P. 137 “Crosses are painted over the doors of Coptic houses in towns and villages or formed in bas- relief in mud over the openings of mud homes. Sometimes the house and cross are brick. The Copts, who are fond of reading the family Bible at home, are aware of Exodus 12:13 and the significance of a sign in order to escape the wrath of the Lord: "And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt.” P.138 “Both Egypt and Islam, like all other countries and ways of life in the modern world, must meet the test of toleration.

For Islam it is a moral challenge spread over its proverbial range from the Atlantic to the Indian Oceans. Citing its theoretical toleration does not silence the cry of its minorities. For a Moslem nation, it is the practical problem of using human resources. The Copts themselves, within the microcosm of their history and its manifestations in church, community, nation and minority, present everyman's tale of dream and nightmare, fulfillment and frustration in a world not of their making. Insofar as the Copts have received their due -- without ignoring their blemishes -- this modern story of Egypt’s Copts is an account of the human condition. At the end of this intimate rendezvous with the Copts, a concluding moral note is unavoidable. The obligation to oppose tyranny wherever it stands, even when the tyranny is elusive and unannounced, even unintended. It begins with labeling injustice long before shop windows are smashed, icons broken, and families torn apart. This labeling is an antidote to the danger of dulled sensibilities in our time and while the Copts can be accused of hypersensitivity, their problem is by no means imaginary.

They are feeling pressures that inflict suffering without mutilating, that intimidate relentlessly without exploding sporadically that wound without bloodshed.” “The Copts are numbed and helpless as well as anxious as their historic cycles of acceptance and rejection, their recurring stages of toleration, discrimination, and persecution move inexorably in the direction of rejection. Persecution is still the nightmare, discrimination the reality in the latest chapter of a long story of a people. They are there in Egypt and there they remain, the "true Egyptians," the "original Christians," the four million Copts of the Nile Valley, that troubled, enduring, lonely minority.” Pp. 175 and 176 Egypt's Coptic Christians are under attack | New Republic By Nina Shea June 10, 2011 In July 2008, Bishop Thomas, the Coptic Orthodox Bishop of El-Qussia Diocese in Upper Egypt, delivered a talk in Washington about the cultural history of his co-religionists, entitled “The Experience of the Middle East’s Largest Christian Community during a Time of Rising Islamization.” His lecture ignited an immediate explosion within Egypt’s government-controlled media and mosques.

Muslim Brotherhood members, Salafis, and assorted other Islamists heatedly denounced Thomas in over 200 articles, calling for him to be put on trial for treason and accusing him of supporting a “Zionist plot,” delivering an “insolent denial of a long history of Islamic tolerance,” and other treacheries. At the following Friday prayers, the sheikh of the neighboring Al-Rahma mosque in Qussia threatened violence: “[I say to] you the traitors, there are men among the Muslims who will spill your blood …. [M]y helpers will sever the legs of all those who assist the traitor [Bishop Thomas].” The angry aftermath, as much as the content of the bishop’s lecture, provides invaluable insight into what we’re seeing in Egypt today—namely, a reinvigorated effort by some of the country’s more radical Islamists to establish Egypt’s identity as a thoroughly Islamicized and Arabicized state.

Egypt’s Coptic Christians, who number about 10 percent of the country’s 80 million people and now constitute the largest non-Muslim religious community in Egypt, are the most visible bloc standing in the way of impatient jihadists and violent Salafis, who reject the Muslim Brotherhood’s stated approach of a more gradual and democratic cultural shift. No less an authority than Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden’s top lieutenant and an Egyptian, was not shy about stating this in a three-part “Message of Hope and Glad Tidings to Our People in Egypt,” released on websites in late February. In his speech, Zawahiri demonized Copts as “one of Egypt’s main problems” and called Coptic Pope Shenouda a “Zionist traitor.” Since then, a heightened campaign of violence is being directed against Egypt’s Copts and is presaging a mass exodus from the country—an event which, if it transpires, will have devastating effects on the multicultural makeup of the entire Middle East. In 2008, anti-Copt sentiments spiked following the Bishop’s presentation because his main point—that the Copts are true Egyptians—had hit a nerve.

Coptic Orthodoxy is a two thousand year old church native to Egypt that traces its origins to the Apostle Mark. The name “Copt,” Bishop Thomas explained, is derived from the root of the ancient Greek word for Egypt, Aegyptos. When the Arabs invaded Egypt in 639 AD, for linguistic reasons they pronounced the “gy” as a “ka.” The Arabs brought to Egypt their religion, as well as their language. The Bishop stated that the Coptic identity centers on Egypt, its land, language and culture, while Egyptians who converted to Islam shifted their cultural identity toward Arabia. He gave examples of how this cultural shift was advanced under Mubarak, 1,400 years after it began, through, for example, a ban on teaching the Coptic language in public schools, the relabelling of Coptic crafts, art, and architecture as “Islamic,” and the requirement that Coptic students celebrate the Arab invasion of 639 and memorize parts of the Qur’an. For many in contemporary Egypt, the bishop’s assertion was heresy.

Islamists—and those wanting their political support—view the Copts not as real Egyptians, but, because they are religious holdouts, as second-class citizens or even a fifth column within the state. They are treated accordingly. Copts are officially discriminated against by an Ottoman-era law that restricts their ability to build or even repair their ancient and crumbling churches and monasteries. When they suffer violent assaults by Muslims, they are typically denied justice, with trial judges instead presiding over “reconciliation” sessions, with the victimized Copt being forced to shake hands with his Muslim aggressor. As a rule, Copts have been excluded from government appointments and, in this spring’s recent referendum, the Muslim Brotherhood backed a successful constitutional amendment making it official that Copts (and women) are ineligible for the presidency. In recent decades, Egyptian extremists and security forces have periodically attacked Copts in what the international media mislabels as “sectarian clashes,” but which can more accurately be described as pogroms and acts of terror. Prominent examples are the 2011 New Year’s Eve bombing of the Two Saints Church in Alexandria and the 2010 massacre of worshippers at the Orthodox Christmas mass in Nag Hamadi.

These assaults have only escalated in the current period following Egypt’s revolution, as Islamist extremists, freed from Mubarak’s repression, vie for power and conduct cultural cleansing. For example, this February saw separate brutal attacks by armed forces using heavy machine-gun fire against two Coptic monasteries, ostensibly to address zoning problems stemming from the dhimmi laws restricting church construction. In order to destroy a wall the monks had built to defend their property from raiders, the forces shot and wounded one monk and six church workers at Anba Bishoy Monastery in Wadi Al-Natroun, 110 kilometers north of Cairo. On the same day, in a similar incident, the army attacked the Anba Makarious Al Sakandarie Monastery in Al Fayoum, 130 kilometers southwest of Cairo. On March 4, several thousand men chanting “Allahu Akbar” burned the Coptic Church of St. Mina and St. George—and its irreplaceable relics—in the village of Soul, about 30 kilometers from Cairo.

What had aroused their ire was a romance between a Christian man and a Muslim woman, which sharia law forbids, and the refusal of the woman's father to kill her to restore the community's “honor.” On March 8, a mob armed with guns, clubs, and Molotov cocktails violently beset a vastly outnumbered group of Copts who were demonstrating against the Soul church burning in front of the state television broadcasting building on the outskirts of Cairo. Coptic youth responded with sticks and stones. The Egyptian army, called in to restore order, instead applied more violence, shooting with live ammunition. About 13 people were killed and over 100 wounded. The attacks began near St. Simon the Tanner Monastery, in the large Christian neighborhood on the east side of Cairo popularly known as “Garbage City,” so named because its residents are mostly garbage collectors (who survive by picking through the garbage they collect and reselling what is salvageable). Throughout that night, roving gangs torched Coptic homes and garbage recycling plants and trucks. Under pressure from the international community, and with the encouragement of the Grand Imam of the Islamic University of Al Azhar, the army rebuilt the church in Soul.

But, on May 7, two more churches were attacked. At least 12 people were killed and more than 200 people were wounded in the poor, heavily Christian neighborhood of Imbaba, in northwest Cairo, when Islamists, incited by a rumor of a Muslim woman held captive by Copts, stormed the St. Mina Church, burned the Church of the Virgin Mary to the ground, looted and vandalized several Christian-owned shops, and threw Molotov cocktails at an apartment building. Three years ago, Bishop Thomas concluded his lecture with an appeal to help the Copts remain in their homeland: “We are worried about the large number of immigrants that are leaving Egypt, like all the Middle East; we are worried that the Christians are leaving this area.” Following the revolution, which many Copts supported, Islamists now seem poised to assume power. Fear among Copts that the recent escalation in violence and discrimination is only likely to worsen following Islamist victories at the polls this fall makes their mass exodus, similar to the one that took place in Iraq, seem nearly inevitable. As Egypt’s largest non-Muslim community, the Copts are also the largest of such communities in the entire Muslim Middle East.

And if the Copts do leave, this vast region, historically known as the great multicultural crossroads of civilizations, would see the end of an old and important experience of religious pluralism. This does not bode well for peaceful coexistence with either Israel or the West. We should heed the Bishop’s cry for help before it’s too late. Nina Shea is the director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom and co-author with Paul Marshall of the forthcoming book Silenced: How Apostasy & Blasphemy Codes are Choking Freedom Worldwide. Why Are Egypt's Christians Being Targeted? Weather Why Are Egypt's Christians Being Targeted? The jihadists say the killings are revenge for "Coptic Crusaders" who they claim have forced Muslims to convert to Christianity. 08:44, UK, Monday 16 February 2015 Image Caption: Relatives of the hostages react after the beheading video emerged Mail Egypt's Copts are the largest Christian community in the Middle East and are estimated to account for around 15% of the country's population. "Coptic" is used to describe the native Christians living in the country, where Christianity is a large minority religion.

The Coptic Orthodox Church was founded in the first century by Saint Mark the apostle, who wrote the second Gospel of the New Testament. The church carefully preserves the Orthodox Christian faith and follows the apostles' doctrines. Image Caption: President Abdel Fattah al Sisi (right) meets Coptic Pope Tawadros II (left) A video released on Sunday apparently shows 21 Copts being beheaded by Islamic State-inspired combatants. The footage, entitled "a message signed with blood to the nation of the cross", has a caption in the first few seconds referring to the hostages as "people of the cross, followers of the hostile Egyptian Church". Video: Feb: Egypt Bombs IS Targets It makes reference to Egyptian women Camilia Shehata and Wafa Constantine, the wives of Coptic priests whose alleged conversion to Islam caused a sectarian dispute in Egypt five years ago. Shehata went missing for five days in July 2010 following a domestic argument. Police later found her and escorted her home. Coptic Christians staged protests when she disappeared, but when Shehata was returned Islamists took to the streets claiming she had chosen to convert to Islam and was being held against her will.

Video: 16 Feb - Egypt Jets Hits Militants Wafa Constantine went missing in 2004, reportedly after her husband refused to grant her a divorce. As reports of her conversion to Islam spread, she was temporarily sequestered at a convent. After the hostages are beheaded in the video, a scrolling caption reads: "The filthy blood is just some of what awaits you, in revenge for Camilia and her sisters." Video: Egypt's Warning To Europe Over I.S. Bishop Angaelos, general bishop of the Coptic Orthodox Church in the UK, said the killings had caused "deep feelings of sorrow and pain". "While it may seem illogical or incomprehensible, we also pray for those who have carried out these horrific crimes, that the value of God's creation and human life may become more evident to them, and in this realisation, that the wider effects of pain brought by this and other acts of brutality may be realised and avoided.

"We pray for an end to the dehumanisation of captives who become mere commodities to be bartered, traded and negotiated with." Video: Militants Hit By Egypt Bomb Strikes Bishop Angaelos dismissed the claims about forcefully converting Muslims as "absurd" and "ill-informed, misinformed, propaganda". Top Stories What Makes the Orthodox Churches Strangers to American Mainstream Christianity What Makes the Orthodox Churches Strangers to American Mainstream Christianity an article by Alexey D. Krindatch(Krindach) Patriarch Athenagoras Orthodox Institute akrindatch@aol.com The history of Eastern Christianity in North America traces back into the end of the 18th century, when the first Greek settlement was founded in New Smyrna, FL (1768) and when the Russian Orthodox monks began their selfless missionary work among the native peoples in Alaska (1794). Yet, it was not until WWI that several waves of immigration from the Middle East, the Southern and the Eastern Europe have made the Orthodox (Eastern Christian) Churches a permanently growing and an increasingly visible component of the American religious landscape.

During 20th century the total number of the Orthodox Christians in this country increased from about 50,000 to at least 1,2 million (most expert estimates agree with even more impressive 2 million figure). From the geographically limited territory of Alaska (Russian colonists, native Alaskan converts), some areas in California (Russians in San Francisco, Serbs in Jackson, Armenians in Fresno) and Massachusetts (Armenian communities in Cambridge, Watertown, Worcester), the coal mines and steel centers of Pennsylvania (Serbs, Carpatho-Russians) and the few urban centers (Greeks in New York, Chicago, Boston; Orthodox Arabs in New York, Romanians in Cleveland, Albanians in Boston), the Eastern Christians have spread today all across the country. These geographic changes can be attributed both to continuing immigration from the Old World and to the new patterns of settlement of children and grandchildren of the “old” Orthodox immigrants. In fact, today, some of the Orthodox Churches are among the fastest growing American religious organizations.

For instance, whereas in 1971, there were only three Coptic communities (Arabic speaking Orthodox Christians from Egypt), by the beginning of the third millennium, more than 115 parishes of the Coptic Orthodox Church have been organized all across the country. The Eastern Christianity in the USA is represented by more than 20 various Churches (the Orthodox Christians themselves tend to speak about “Orthodox jurisdictions”), which belong to two major ecclesiastical families: the so-called Orthodox Oriental (Armenian, Coptic, Syrian, etc.) and the Orthodox Byzantine Churches (Greek, Russian, Serbian, Romanian, etc.). They number total about 2,400 local parochial communities, but vary greatly in size. Whereas the Greek Archdiocese of North America has more than 530 parishes, the tiny Albanian Orthodox Diocese consists of two parishes only. Two circumstances are essential for understanding the nature of the Orthodox Christian Churches in North America: 1. Historically, the notion “one state – one people – one Church” was quite characteristic of Eastern Christianity.

Therefore, when Orthodox Christians are asked about religious affiliation, they normally add an ethnic qualifier to identify their membership in a particular Orthodox Church: Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Syrian Orthodox, etc. Accordingly, the Eastern Christians in America share the same faith and sacraments, but the Orthodox Churches as institutions have been historically organized in this country as independent from each other and ethnically-based jurisdictions. 2. Most American Orthodox Churches remain the subdivisions of and subordinate (though with the various levels of autonomy) to one of the Mother Orthodox Churches in the Old World. Such inseparable integrity of religion and ethnicity combined with the administrative linkage to the Mother Churches overseas resulted in a situation, when the Orthodox Churches and the Eastern Christians in the United States have been always affected by political, religious and social transformations occurring back in the Old World. For example, the establishment of the Communist regimes in the Soviet Union and later in the Eastern Europe has caused the internal confrontation and the political breaks among the Russian (1920s), Armenian (1933), Serbian (1963), Bulgarian (1963) and Romanian (1951) Orthodox parishes in America.

Each of these groups has been split into two hostile factions: those remaining true to the Church headquarters abroad and the others, which have maintained that the Mother Church and its leaders were manipulated by the new Communist authority and which have formed more or less independent Church-jurisdictions. As a result, today there exist several “duplicated” American Orthodox Churches, which share the same historic origin, ethnic ancestry and cultural heritage, yet being separated from each other by inveterate political divisions. In spite of their long historic presence in the USA – a nation that has perfectly accommodated the Roman Catholics and the countless Protestant denominations, Jews and Mormons - the Eastern Christians are still frequently perceived as an alienated element in the country’ pluralistic religious landscape. This perception cannot be explained by the actual social position of Eastern Christians in the USA. There is no doubt, for instance, that Greeks are among the most wealthiest and better educated segments of American society or that Armenians form an influential political lobby in the national Capitol. Neither can this stereotype be attributed to the participation of the Orthodox Churches in the American ecumenical organizations. Today, most of them are the full members of National Council of Churches.

In fact, comparing with their modest size, the American Orthodox Churches have a significant impact on decision making within NCC. For example, out of about 40 members of NCC executive board, 5-6 places are normally occupied by Eastern Christians. The Eastern Christians have been always especially vocal in the NCC “Faith and Order Commission.” Fr. Leonid Kishkovskij (Orthodox Church in America) served as NCC president in 1988-1998, whereas Mrs.Eleni Huszagh (Greek Orthodox Archdiocese) is the current NCC president and Dr. Tony Kireopoulos (Greek Orthodox Archdiocese) holds the position of the NCC Associate General Secretary. The question “Why the Eastern Christian Churches are still perceived by many as the strangers to American society” is a controversial one. Several circumstances must be taken into account to respond it adequately. 1) Traditionally, in these Churches, a high priority has been given to the preservation of the ethnic heritage and identity of their members.

This has been done in several ways: by retaining in the Church the language of the mother country; by the establishment of parochial all-day schools as a substitute for the regular American public schools; by organizing a network of one-day schools (that exist separately from religious Sunday schools with the purpose to teach the language, geography, literature and history of the mother country); by establishing nationwide Orthodox “ethnic” women and youth organizations, etc. As a result, the Eastern Christians in the USA remain to a significant extent in the self-isolated ethnic communities in spite of the gradual disappearance of what used to be known as “traditional urban ethnic neighborhoods.” According, to the results of author’s survey, which investigated the parishes of six various American Orthodox jurisdictions: ( view the questionnaire or the paper " Eastern Christianity in North American Religious Landscape "), today, less than one fifth of Orthodox Christians live in a walking-distance from their church-buildings and more than two fifth commute for at least 30 minutes to come to the church. Yet, the statement “Our parish has a strong ethnic heritage and identity that we are trying to preserve” describes “quite well” the situation in 47% of Orthodox parishes participating in the survey.

Only 27% of parishes have indicated that they are trying “to increase their ethnic and cultural diversity.” 2) Though to the different extent, but in comparison with the Roman Catholic and the mainstream Protestant Churches the Orthodox Churches can be defined as rather exclusive than inclusive religious organizations. This is especially obvious in their internal policies with regard to the inter-Christian (Orthodox-Not-Orthodox) marriages and future religion of children born in these mixed families. In most extreme cases some of the Orthodox Churches (for instance, Coptic Orthodox Church or the Old Calendarist “Holy Orthodox Church in North America”) require Roman Catholics or mainstream Protestants to become first Orthodox in order to be married canonically (lawfully) with their own members. The other Orthodox Churches, while allowing “de-jure” their members to be married with the Not-Orthodox Christians, still require future spouses to first sign an agreement to baptize the future children in the Orthodox Church. In general, most of Orthodox Churches try to avoid having mixed families among their members.

This is achieved either by the discouraging of the inter-Christian and inter-ethnic marriages (which is the case of the Oriental Orthodox Churches), or, to the contrary, by the encouraging conversion to Orthodoxy of the Not-Orthodox part of a couple. As a result, today the proportion of mixed inter-Christian (“Orthodox-Not Orthodox”) marriages is below 20% in almost half and it is below 5% in one third of the North American Orthodox parishes which have participated in author’s survey. 3) A very characteristic feature of American religious life is the fact that church participation serves normally also as a gateway to other forms of civic engagements. In the other words, the abundance of diverse social and charity programs affiliated with local religious congregations is almost “a must” in this country. Not so in the case of the American Orthodox Churches. In all measures, the parishes of Eastern Christian Churches demonstrate a rather low level of the interest to active civic participation in the lives of the local communities, where they are situated. Also the social services sponsored by the parishes of Orthodox Churches are frequently offered exclusively to the members of the parish and not to all inhabitants of the local territorial communities.

True, a certain proportion of the Orthodox Christians in the USA (especially the so-called “new immigrants”) do not identify themselves with the wider American society, because of linguistic and cultural differences. Yet, this fact itself is insufficient to explain the reluctant attitude of the Eastern Christian Churches towards church-based social activities.. It must be pointed out that the relationship between two notions , “vitality of congregational/parochial life” and “active social service for community”, which is characteristic for the Orthodox Christians is distinctly different in comparison with their Western Christian counterparts. For instance, in the Orthodox parishes participating in author’s survey, the optimistic self-estimation “Our parish is active and alive” (reported by 63% parishes) has had very little correlation with the statement “Our parish has various well organized social programs and activities” (reported by 23% parishes). The Orthodox Christians view the church as a place for worship, for unity with God and for Holy Communion, but the very American notion of “church as a social club” is rather strange for them. As a result, the liturgical functions exceed by far the social ones in the case of the American Orthodox Churches.

4) The Eastern Christians in America differ essentially from the Roman Catholics and Protestants by the role and position of clergy in organizing lives of their local religious communities. Some scholars even use the term “ethnarcy” in order to describe the strong combination of the priestly vocation with the socio-ethnic leadership of clergy in the American Orthodox parishes. Our survey, for instance, demonstrated that 3/4 of Orthodox parishes consider the “guidance of the ruling bishop” as “very important source of spiritual authority” in the daily life of a parish. Much smaller proportion of surveyed parishes view “human reason and understanding” (39%) or “historic and ethnic tradition and culture” (35%) as the equally important sources of spiritual authority. The powerful definition “ethnarcy” might be a certain overstatement, or, at least, not applicable to all American Orthodox Churches.

The fact is, however, that the whole life of the Orthodox parish is much more centered around the priest’ personality than it is the case in the American Roman Catholic parishes or in the Protestant congregations, where the priest is frequently seen simply as an “employee” and the process of decision making is largely in the hands of the members of the congregational board or council. A few above examples demonstrate that the visible estrangement of the Orthodox Churches from the American mainstream Christianity is largely based on the style of life in their parishes and on the vision of their mission (for whom and in what way to serve), both of which are in many aspects distinct from the Roman Catholic and the Protestant Churches. This situation, however, must be interpreted neither as the deliberate creation of the barriers by the Orthodox Churches nor as their “us versus them” approach. The Orthodox Churches are not “against”, but simply (as of now, at least) “not particularly interested” in becoming an integral part of American religious establishment. Furthermore, the ethnically based distinctions divide the Orthodox Churches among themselves to the extent that there is almost no any practical co-operation between them in America.

The “Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in Americas” (SCOBA) – a permanent association of the hierarchs of all major American Orthodox Churches founded in 1960 – functions barely as a rather formal deliberative body. Two major American inter-Orthodox co-operative organizations – “International Orthodox Christian Charity” and “Orthodox Christian Mission Center” – run 99 % of their programs outside of the country and not in the USA. In fact, some examples suggest that in the communities of Eastern Christians the “ethnic loyalty” is even above “religious” one. For instance, among Armenians and Ukrainians living in the USA there are not only Orthodox, but also Catholics and Protestants. Yet the uniting factor of the common ethnic identity, culture and heritage is immeasurably stronger than the formal religious differences inside these communities in the case of making choices “whom to marry,” “to which school to send the children,” etc. Today, various Christian Churches in American pluralistic and increasingly secular society are in the competition with other religious and secular options that strive to interpret reality. They have responded differently to this challenge of modernity.

The success of their interaction with the social realm requires sensitivity to their public image and development of conversational skills, and, yet, adherence to their particularity and the catholicity of the Christian story. In the other words, the Church is challenged to find the ways to be simultaneously mystical and prophetic, spiritual and social active, uniting liturgy with life. Perhaps, the major challenge facing the Orthodox Churches in this country is a temptation of the mere emphasis on the only Church’s function and exclusively for the “own flock.” It carries the danger of social isolationism and would (comfortably?) locate the Orthodox Churches in the private sphere of their adherents while excluding them from the participation in the civic society. Accordingly, the fundamental dilemma that Eastern Christian Churches are facing as they try to find their place in the American public life is not whether they should witness their moral tradition and faith, but how this can be done in the unprecedented for them American pluralistic context.

Question: In religion, Copts are native Christians of which country?
Answer: Egypt